Paper detail

Subsonic turbulence in smoothed particle hydrodynamics and moving-mesh simulations

Highly supersonic, compressible turbulence is thought to be of tantamount importance for star formation processes in the interstellar medium. Likewise, cosmic structure formation is expected to give rise to subsonic turbulence in the intergalactic medium, which may substantially modify the thermodynamic structure of gas in virialized dark matter halos and affect small-scale mixing processes in the gas. Numerical simulations have played a key role in characterizing the properties of astrophysical turbulence, but thus far systematic code comparisons have been restricted to the supersonic regime, leaving it unclear whether subsonic turbulence is faithfully represented by the numerical techniques commonly employed in astrophysics. Here we focus on comparing the accuracy of smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) and our new moving-mesh technique AREPO in simulations of driven subsonic turbulence. To make contact with previous results, we also analyze simulations of transsonic and highly supersonic turbulence. We find that the widely employed standard formulation of SPH yields problematic results in the subsonic regime. Instead of building up a Kolmogorov-like turbulent cascade, large-scale eddies are quickly damped close to the driving scale and decay into small-scale velocity noise. Reduced viscosity settings improve the situation, but the shape of the dissipation range differs compared with expectations for a Kolmogorov cascade. In contrast, our moving-mesh technique does yield power-law scaling laws for the power spectra of velocity, vorticity and density, consistent with expectations for fully developed isotropic turbulence. We show that large errors in SPH's gradient estimate and the associated subsonic velocity noise are ultimately responsible for producing inaccurate results in the subsonic regime. In contrast, SPH's performance is much better for supersonic turbulence. [Abridged]

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.